Gout disease-specific quality of life and the association with gout characteristics

Original Research

(2866) Views  (936) Full article downloads

Authors: Jan D Hirsch, Robert Terkeltaub, Dinesh Khanna, et al

Published Date March 2010 Volume 2010:1 Pages 1 - 8

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S8310

Jan D Hirsch^1,4, Robert Terkeltaub⁴, Dinesh Khanna⁵, Jasvinder Singh⁶, Andrew Sarkin², Micki Shieh², Arthur Kavanaugh³, Susan J Lee^3,4

¹Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, ²Health Services Research, ³Center for Innovative  Therapy, Division of Rheumatology, Allergy, and Immunology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; ⁴Veterans Administration San Diego Healthcare System, La Jolla, CA, USA; ⁵Department of Medicine/Rheumatology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; ⁶Department of Medicine/Rheumatology, Minneapolis VA Healthcare System, Minneapolis MN, USA

Purpose: Assess the association of gout characteristics with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using a new gout-specific HRQoL instrument, the Gout Impact Scale (GIS).

Patients and methods: Gout patients completed the GIS (five scales [0–100 score each] representing impact of gout overall [three scales] and during an attack [two scales]) and other questions describing recent gout attacks, treatment, gout history, comorbidities, and demographics. Physicians confirmed gout diagnosis, presence of tophi, and most recent serum uric acid (sUA) level. Relationships between gout characteristics and GIS scores were examined using analysis of variance and correlation analyses.

Results: The majority of patients were male (90.2%) with a mean age of 62.2 (±11.8) years. Approximately one-half (49.7%) reported ≥3 gout attacks in the past year and the majority (57.9%) reported experiencing gout-related pain between attacks. Patients had appreciable concern about their gout (“gout concern overall” scale, 63.1 ± 28.0) but believed their treatment was adequate (“unmet gout treatment need” scale (38.2 ± 21.4) below scale mid-point). Significantly worse GIS scores were associated with increasing attack frequency and greater amount of time with pain between attacks (most scales, P < 0.001). Common objective measures such as sUA level, presence of tophi and the number of joints involved in a typical attack did not appear to be good indicators of the impact of gout on the patients’ HRQoL.

Conclusion: Attack frequency and gout pain between attacks were important correlates of patients’ ratings of gout impact on their HRQoL. Further studies are needed to determine the minimal important difference for each GIS scale and interpret our results relative to other patient populations with gout.

Keywords: Gout impact scale, GIS, patient-reported outcomes

Readers of this article also read: